What is With This Loss of Innocence? The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Nighttime

The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Nighttime is, let there be no mistake, not about a dog. That sour plot line merely guides the complex, realistic, and utterly simple thought process of the main character: Christopher. Unknowingly Christopher discovers many important things about things he deemed unimportant. He might even solve the grates mystery of all.

Christopher is always referring to white. "White noise, white sparks, white lies". He isn’t aware of how often he talks of white. White stands for innocence. This is odd because Christopher is many things, but he is not innocent. He has so many really hard things to deal with, like his mother, his behavior disorder, and his neighbors. He is well aware of the kind of world that is out there.

But then again, he is sort of innocent. He has this wonderful dream to become an astronaut. He says it’s to be alone. That is so childish. Not in the bad way, but in the sweet way. Christopher is like a 3 year old trapped in the mind of a 40 year old.

Christopher has a very complex history too. We are told that his mother is dead and that his father has to raise Christopher on his own. Christopher is such a blank pallet, he really doesn’t show emotion. But there is this story in the book about time he went to the beach and his mother dived into the water and Christopher screamed because he thought she had been eaten by a shark. Christopher really truly does care.

Christopher has major walls up. He doesn’t trust strangers, and even the people he knows exist he doesn’t trust. He only trusts his father, and I think that is just Christopher following what is expected, and a few others. He doesn’t let people touch him, even his dad. He doesn’t get close to anyone, because he knows what they can do. He has nowhere to turn to and nowhere to go. That makes him the least innocent of all.

The Young vs the Old - Perspective in The Invention of Hugo Cabret

In The Invention of Hugo Cabret, the perspective of the young, and aspiring is amplified, while the perspective of the old and finalized are ignored. Hugo in the story, is so full of life, and is constantly finding mysteries and trouble, uncovering long lost secrets and living freely without adult supervision. The elderly, however, sit quietly behind a counter, allowing their lives to be unraveled by curious children.

Through out the book, you never hear about how the grandpa feels about two children pushing through his deepest secret. For some reason, the media of today has decided that the old are not as respected and are never treated as key components. Their opinions are seemingly used, let alone viewed as important.

What I don’t understand is that the elderly use to be respected above a lot of people, for their wisdom and experience. For some reason we have fallen out of sync with this moral. And this is just the tip of the iceberg.

There is this strong competition between the old and the new. This is reflected everywhere; in age, style, clothing, and even on Survivor, where the young and old a literally trying to see who will out last the other.

Because of age, we have pre assumed beliefs about people. People are treated VERY differently based on age. Then based on where you are. For example, at an opera, a 4 year old might be watched with weary eyes, but at a club, a 50-something wont have the best time. This affects whom you sit with, and whom you talk to. It’s subtle, but people really are judged by age, and while it’s never the top of the spectrum, it’s always there

What I find interesting is that the very young are perceived as innocent, silly, immature. The young are perceived as newly open, just not immature, and just aware. The middle aged is perceived as holding on to long to their past, unwilling to change. The elderly perceived as done, with life and opinions; they never seem to care, in our prejudice. Yet, no matter what age we are, we always seem to think we know everything

Justice of Strength in The Lost Hero

I recently finished reading The Lost Hero. In the very last few pages, our suspicions of a roman half blood camp become reveled. And we know absolutely nothing. We do know things about the Greek half blood camp however; it is accepting. The only major fact that sticks out to us about the Roman camp is "show strength and be accepted, show weakness and die"

At the Greek camp, strength is defined by not just brutal power, but goodness of heart. Being able to create and build things. Being a positive person. Being a good person. Of course, that’s leaving out the minor details about all the evil demigods that joined Kronos and helped destroy half of Manhattan...

But then, at the roman camp the half bloods have to prove they are worthy by being a strong, military like, leaders. And while punishment of death for being weaker is a little harsh, nothing like Luke would have ever happened.

Luke, who was the stepping stone of Kronos to destroy Olympus, stands for all different types of strength. He is clearly a good fighter, but has bad judgment, however he was able to sacrifice him self to save the world. 

Ancient Greece was about point of view. Artistic and scientific theories combined. Ancient Rome was realistic, and all about fighting. Ancient Greece fell because of loss of resources. Ancient Rome fell because they had their empire spread to thin. Honestly in the end, they both fell. They cancel each other out. I don’t think one is stronger then the other.

I don’t know why we always have to make everything a competition. Why does everything have to be compared, everything have to be better? People are always fighting, physically fighting and for what? Pure boasting rights of strength. Congratulations, you have a big muscle on your arm. Of course I am not saying that smarts or charm is all you need, but that you need them all.

The gods (Greek or roman) are always fighting, viewed separate. They all control one thing (air, water, love) but what does that make up? Planet earth. Why do people always divide them selves a different? As special? If we could just see that we are just parts of a bigger game, pieces in the grand scheme of things, maybe we wouldn’t always have to be better then every one else.

But then, maybe people realize they are just like everyone else and want to get ahead of them purely to be different. I guess you shouldn’t try to take that away. Maybe boasting right is all we have.

What Really Hard Things Are Happening here?: The Lost Hero and Finding Yourself

In the book The Lost Hero, Jason doesn’t have a memory. His memory begins at the moment you start to read the book. He knows as much as you know. The motivation of his quest is to get his memory back.

            It’s hard for us to imagine going out into the world and not knowing anything about our selves. How should we act in response to other people? Should we be concerned about wrong things we have done in the past? Are we known or behind the veil that covers most of humanity from sight?

            So, yes: There is the level of memory loss, but then there is more the simple fact of not knowing who you are. Finding you; this is literally what Jason is doing. It’s interesting because, you almost have to go backwards on this idea to be deeper.  Losing your memory is more of a reason, yet it’s more obvious then finding yourself. Where does the true dilemma lie?

            I find that figuring out who you are is like reading your own writing piece; you don’t notice all the little spelling errors, but everyone else does. Strangely enough, it seems like we define ourselves by the bad and negative side of what we do, never by the positive and good. I think this is because we believe that the bad things we do have more of an impact then the good, which is true.
            Nowadays, kindness and sweet thoughts are challenged and diminished. If you say something like “you have pretty eyes” or “I love your laugh” people say “uh thanks?” or get self conscious. No one seems able to take a compliment or appreciate what they do. I hate when I say something nice, and all I get in return is a weird look like I am crazy.

            Jason seems vulnerable to the fact that other people have to define who he is because he doesn’t know. Piper believes that they were dating, but that was an illusion. I believe that once we get a sense about who we are, or at least who we want to be, we gain some stability, and learn how to withstand criticism. Also I think that everyone is ever changing, meaning it’s hard to “find yourself” because you have changed since you started looking. Can you really “find yourself?”

There is something, material about finding yourself. Knowing where you live, how you live, and what you have. Honestly, I don’t think you can find yourself on an emotional and personal level, only on a material one. Because, while you materials are replaceable, and forever, your emotions are forever changing.

Through An Architect Eyes: a reaserch blog on The Phantom Tollbooth

            Your can not, CAN NOT go through life with out seeing a building. It just doesn’t work that way. You are born in one, near one, in sight of one… and thus, you have seen a building. So what? It’s a building. Just something that’s supported on a foundation that’s precisely measured to be supportive, and beams of wood and cement and metal that intertwine into a web that makes the frame for the basic outline of some shape that will able to house a living thing. It’s just a building.

            Norton Juster, the author of the Phantom Tollbooth, was an architect. He spent time on blueprints mapping out every angle, every dimension, and every last bit. It must have taken forever to put together just a basic plan of action to start building. Do you think anyone ever really stopped and though about that? No. Even your house is that complicated and yet so VERY taken for granted.     

            With the knowledge and experience of an architect, Norton Juster perceived a lot this way, and proves it in his book. The world he builds, The Land Beyond, is actually a deconstructed version of our society that we live in today. Norton must of thought about that, when coming up with the idea for the book.

            He’s saying “HEY! Don’t take the world for granted! Look at it! See what’s really there!” just like a building. He wants us too look past the paint job, and wallpaper, and flooring, and pictures, and rugs, and everything we use to cover up the plain and simple foundation, and look at what is really there.

             With all honesty, I think that wooden beams that are angled and balanced perfectly enough to support a building, is more beautiful then some floral wallpaper. What do you think makes the world the world it is? The foundation or the details?

            On page 155, one of the characters says “no one realizes how much trouble we go though to make them”. I see a little secret author’s intrusion. I only found out the Norton Juster was an Architect, towards the end of the book. So I wonder what else I’ve missed involving that. So I guess… yes, it is just a building    

Fern and Innocence

Fern isn’t made to imperfect. She isn’t deep enough to be imperfect. But she is the shifter. Fern is mad to be an innocent 8 year old, who is in love with the simplicity of life and the wonders of being alive. But she isn’t that deep. She’s a “what you see is what you get” kind of character.

         

However, if you dig deeper, fern is indecisive. She doesn’t realize what she does to Wilbur because of her innocence, but it tortures him. She loves him so much. She saves his LIFE. She does everything for him and then leaves him. Then she comes back, and leaves him again for Henry.  

The one thing about shifters is that they never lose one thing, and for fern, it’s that she never stops loving Wilbur. I don’t think she ever forgets him either, the pig who showed her life.

I also though about Templeton in the same way. That he was the shifter not fern. He does shift, Wilbur to laziness. But in the end, food always ALWAYS wins him over. I believe that he is not the shifter, because in the end, the subject he was shifting on, he always went one way. Fern didn’t exactly have a goal. She never stopped loving Wilbur but she definitely left him. I feel like they almost do have a romantic relationship. In the eyes of an 8 year old I think she also thinks so. But then she meets Henry Fussy and learns what “love is”.

There’s always a reason why the shifter can’t make up their mind. We have to assume that fern doesn’t come for a reason. She has school, or is away or sick or something. The author doesn’t tell us though. There is kind of a fear to the knowledge that maybe fern didn’t come because she just didn’t want to. That fern actually abandoned Wilbur. I think that’s what Wilbur feared the most. That he was just dropped. For no good reason. 

Death - what we must accept

 Charlottes Web

            Charlotte knows that she must die. Every animal every being, knows it must die. To an animal like us, who live for 80 plus years, a one year life, seems very sad and pathetic. However to a spider like charlotte, this is the norm. This is accepted. Even when charlotte is inches from dying she patiently explains to Wilbur what is going to happen. If charlotte spent every minute of her life, worrying about her death… she might as well have keeled over from the start. But charlottes so much wiser then that. She accepts her death, and in doing so, she leads the best life possible.

            When you find out that charlotte is going to die, your reactions are similar to Wilbur’s. Frantic, panicking, hopeless. But we have to remember that to charlotte, this is a life. She has lived it. It’s been a year. Its time for her to die.

            One day my mother brought home a necklace with beads around a cord. Every bead was a tiny skull. I was concerned it would bring us bad luck. Make something terrible happen to us. We looked it up online and found that it wasn’t a calling of death, but an acceptance of death. Form that day forth, I though of death that way.

            This thing we call “death”, this passing, this losing, this ending. What is it really? It is the mark of completion of ones life. Charlotte did her duty. She saved someone, some pig. Her life was not worthless, and thus she dies peacefully.

            It is only death that comes to soon, by gun or accident or illness, which I think we have a right to grieve for. Sure, let’s be sad, let’s wish whoever was still here… but if it’s their time it’s their time, and you have to get over it.

            I think the knowledge that you could have prevented something and it happened anyways is what really gets us. The fact that every thing could have been different. Wilbur slowly realizes that he couldn’t do anything for charlotte, and pretending to do so, was lying. He helped the only way he could, by making sure that her life lived on in her kids. I wonder if it replaced charlotte at all. I wonder if anything is replaceable.

            The real issue with death is this constant fear of the unknown. If our parents would tell us that when we die, there’s a meadow that we all live in, and play in, we would all feel better. Heck, if they could tell us anything, we would all feel better.

Everything Is Connected

Charlotte’s Web – page 75 – Templeton is connected to Wilbur.

            “Then he remembered that the rat had been useful in saving Charlotte’s life, and that Charlotte was trying to save his life”. This is Wilbur’s train of though as he is eating his lunch. Templeton, Charlotte, Wilbur; all while eating food which is necessary to survive. Templeton is always doing chores for charlotte and I always wonder why, but then I always remind myself that Templeton needs Wilbur to survive. If Wilbur’s gone, then Wilbur’s food is gone. Templeton wouldn’t have much to eat.

            Templeton isn’t a good rat. He never looks out for anyone but himself, he’s lazy, and he is kind of creepy. The thing that intrigues me the most, however, is that he never admits he’s wrong. He may agree with the opposite ideas, but he won’t expose himself to the weakness that being wrong brings.

            Being a rat, I guess he decides to do whats right a little cleverer then average. He indirectly helps Wilbur by helping Charlotte, and in the long run, helps himself. This is what I mean; everything Templeton does is connected to whatever Charlotte does which affects what Wilbur does. It goes past that too, Wilbur to Fern, Fern to her mother, her mother to her father, on and on and on.

            It is mind blowing to think about how almost everything you do is connecting to something else. For example you could really hate this blog, and not continue reading it, and in doing so find some other, better blog and read that or you could really love this blog, become obsessed, never do anything else but read it, and eventually lose all sleep.

            This stretches from the confines of the book, where every character intertwines, to what you do with your day, to how that affects others. There really isn’t an end to it, which is what makes it so interesting! And even when it ends, it always connects back to the beginning.

            After Wilbur says “Then he remembered that the rat had been useful in saving Charlotte’s life, and that Charlotte was trying to save his life” he says “so he left the whole noodle instead of half”. This is actually really sad. Wilbur was only thinking about one point, but he didn’t realize how much Templeton was doing for him. It’s really an unjust reward, a noodle. Yet, the sad thing is, is that most of us never get recognition, let alone a reward for the good (or bad) effects we have on people’s life and world. Don’t we deserve more?

            I know that through out the book, Templeton helps Charlotte save Wilbur, and is always complaining about it. Yet, you have to think about it, he must feel very under-appreciated. All anyone ever talks about him, is what a horrible rat he is, when in truth, he is a helpful one. I think Templeton learned that you can look out for yourself, and help others at the same time. It’s a little over done, but I think it’s a really important balance to strike and understand, and Templeton has achieved that.